STATE OF FLORIDA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY. THE PETITION FOR DECLARATORY STATEMENT OF ROBERT S. KLEIN, Ph.D. FINAL ORDER

Transcription

1 STATE OF FLORIDA BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY Department of Health B ~ t. l e a h?au ~ Deputy Agency Clerk IN RE: THE PETITION FOR DECLARATORY STATEMENT OF ROBERT S. KLEIN, Ph.D. FINAL ORDER THIS MATTER came before the Board of Psychology ("Board") pursuant to Section , Florida Statutes, at a dulynoticed public meeting held on August 22, 2003, in Tampa, Florida, for the purpose of considering the Petition for Declaratory Statement filed July 28, 2003, by Robert S. Klein, Ph.D. ("Petitioner"). Having considered the petition, the Board makes the following findings and conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Petitioner is in the private practice of psychology and was initially appointed by the court during a dependency proceedina to provide counseling to a minor child and the child's divorced parents and did provide said counseling. Petitioner was informed in a subsequent court order that he might rnake recommendations to the court regarding the mother's visitation and the best interests of the child. 2. Petitioner seeks a declaratory statement regarding Rule , Florida Administrative Code, and the performance of a forensic evaluation for visitation of a minor. 3. Petitioner asks: If this psychologist were to make recommendations as invited by the court order in regard to the mother's visitation with the minor child, would this psychologist be in violation of Rule 64B , Florida Administrative Code?

2 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Board has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Section , Florida Statutes. 2. Rule 64B , Florida Administrative Code, provides that it is a conflict of interest for a psychologist who has treated a minor or any of the adults involved in a custody or visitation action to perform a forensic evaluation for the purpose of recommending with which adult the minor should reside, which adult should have custody, or what visitation should be allowed. Consequently, a psychologist who treats a minor or any of the adults involved in a custody or visitation action may not also perform a forensic evaluation for custody, residence, or visitation of the minor. 3. The Board states that it would be a violation of Rule 64B , Florida Administrative Code, for a psychologist who has treated a minor or any of the adults involved in a custody or visitation action to perform forensic evaluation for the purpose of recommending with which adult the minor should reside, which adult should have custody, or what visitation should be allowed. 4. This Order constitutes final agency action and may be appealed by any party pursuant to Section , Florida Statutes, and Rules and 9.190, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, by filing a notice of appeal conforming to the requirements of Rule 9.110(d), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, both with the appropriate District Court of Appeal, accompanied by the appropriate filing fee, and with the department's clerk of agency proceedings, within thirty (30) days of rendition of this Order.

3 DONE AND ORDERED this day of, / BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY &wa werton, Executive Director for~aturah JenkinsHall, Ph.D., Chair CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was furnished by U.S. Mail to Robert S. Klein, Ph.D., 901 North Hercules Ave., Ste. G, Clearwater, Florida 33765; and by interoffice mail to Mary Ellen Clark, Assistant Attorney General, Administrative Law Section, PL01 The Capitol, Tallahassee, Florida , this %m day of I~Y, 2003.

4 CENTER FOR PSYCHOLOGY & EDUCATIONAL SE 901 N. Hercules Avenue Suite G Clearwater. Florida Petitioner: Robert S. Klein, Ph.E). 961 North Hercules Avenuc Suite G Clearwater, Florida Phone: (727) Fax: (727) Robert S. Klein. Ph.D.. PA Child. Adolescent and Adult Psyehobgy July 24,2003 s ~. r.. ~. ~.. ~~.... Petition Declaratory Statement before the Board of Psychology ~... u:.?.> 7 C.1).~* ~. fl ;: RE: Statute 64B Description: This psychologisi was appointed to provide counseling to a minor child and the child's divorced parents. The father had primxy residency, the mother had standard visitation Following the divorce as a result of the Department of Children and Families (in Pinellas County known as Family Continuity) becoming involved the minor child, 9 years of age, was adjudicated dependent and the child continued under the primary residential care of the father. The mother was placed under restricted limited supervised visitation, one hour every two weeks. Please find the initial court order appointing this psychologist as the family counselor. See Although the Court had not in its initial order, ordered for this psychologist to make recommendations regarding the mother's visitation, the mother's counsel, as well as the Department of Children and Families requested that this psychologist make recommendations to be presented at mediation andlor to the Court as it was their belief that was the Court's intent. Again, as this was not in the initial court order this psychologist requested an additional order from the court or clarification. This was acco~npiished on May 27,2003, in which the Court ordered "Dr. Klein may submit recommendations to the Court regarding the best interests of the L~censed Psychologist: PY Llsted in the National Register of Health Servlce Providers In Psychology

5 child arising from his counseling of the family." See attached exhibit B. Please be advised that to date this psychologist has made no recommendations regarding the minor child's visitation with the mother. The purpose of my seeking a declaratory statement from the Board is the following: 1. As this psychologist has not been appointed to conduct a custodylvisitation evaluation; 2. As this psychologist has been appointed by the Court to provide family counseling; 3. As this psychologist has been appointed by the court in an order "Dr. Klein may submit recommendatims to the Court regardiag the be3 interests of the child arising from his counseling of the family"; Question: If this psychologist were to make recommendations as so ordered by the Court in regard to the mother's visitation with the minor child is this psychologist potentially in violation of 64B ? Thank you very much for your kind and prompt attention to this request for declaratory statement. Please know that the parties, counsel, and Department of Children and Families have requested that this psychologist present recommendations regarding the mother's visitation. Should there be need for additional information or clarification of that which has been presented please do not hesitate to contact me directly 3~ilicidy,... ':.' Robert S. Klein, Ph.D. f f a

6 Exhibit A C.?py to Client 9C.!.,b&. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY JUVENILE DIVISION In the Interest of: A Child. : : DOB:." ,.....,.. ORDER ON CONTINUED ARRAIGNMENT mi.5 CAUSE coming on to be heard on ' : : 2003, for an arraignment upon a Petition for Adjudication of Dependency filed by the State of Florida, and all parties having been properb <.d noticed, and the Court having before it, ~ssiutant State Attorney: Family Continuity Program;,( CPI. ; ~ \, mother; Esquire, counsel ~. representing the mother;, the father; c ( 1 1 Esquire, counsel representing the father, and the court having considered the Petition for Adjudication of Dependency and having heard testimony and argument being fully advised in the premises finds the following: 1. The Court has jurisdiction over the child and the subject matter involved in this proceeding in that the child is domiciled, living or found in the child is under eighteen (18) years of age. County, Florida, and that 2. The mother, : was previously duly served by summons and noticed of this hearing and ha8 appeared before the Court.

7 Exhibit A 3. The father,. was previously duly served by summons and noticed of this hearing and has appeared before the Court. 4. The parents have indicated that they have received, have read, and understand the allegations made by the State in the Petition for Dependency. 5. The parents have been advised of their right to have an attorney represent them at each stage of the dependency proceedings.. ~. Eequire, represents the mother. Esquire, represents the father '. 6. The parents have been advised that they have the right to admit, deny or consent to the allegations contained in the :;.. a 2 Petition for Dependency and have been advised of the consequ&cee{ = of ao admitting, denying or consenting. The parents have be: 1,... further advised of their right to a trial in this cause, whi& would require the State to put on testimony to prove by a c,?. ' 0 preponderance of the evidence that the child is dependent. 7. The mother, having indicated an understanding of the rights listed above, has entered a denial plea to the adjudication of the child as dependent. 8. The father,, having indicated an understanding of the rights listed above, has entered a denial plea to the adjudication of the child as dependent. 9. With regard to the child's placement and visitation issues, the best interests of the child has been conaidered. 10. The State has made reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for court intervention, but present circumstances of the family are much that the welfare of the

8 t _... I., child cannot be adequately safeguarded without such court intervention. It is therefore ORDERED that as this matter is in a contested Posture, thie matter shall be set for mediation status check on at 9 a.m. If the parties are unable to reach an agreement as the result thereof, this matter is continued for and shall be set for trial as soon as is practicable. he parties have agreed to court ordered mediation in this matter. The parties 'further agree to begin counseling with Dr. Robert Kline. 2.. It la further ORDERED that'the parents shall appear fo=she :,:/.. trial in this cause, and their failure to do so will be... > considered a consent to the adjudication of the child by defadt. 1: It is further ORDERED that the child shall remain in the C?..~ temporary care, custody and control of the father,., / under the supervision of the Department of Children and ~amilies/family Continuity Program, pending further Order of the Court. It is further ORDERED that during all stages of the dependency proceedings if any party changes residence he or she shall notify the Clerk of Court, Juvenile Division, and the Aseietant State Attorney of the address change immediately. address currently in the Court file will be used by the Court and the State for notice purposes unlerarr and until the party notifies,ha court and the State in writing of a new mailing address. ~t is further ORDERED that all prior Ordars not inconeistent with the terms of this Order shall remain in full force and effect. he

9 . Exhibit A., <.,.I. PAGE 85 The parties are hereby advised of their right to appeal, which appeal shall be commenced within thirty (30) days from the date of entry of any final Order, Judgment or Decree of this Court. The parties are advised of their right to counsel for appeal purposes. The custodians of any child subject to the juriediction of this Court ara hereby directed to notify local law enforcement and the Department of Children and Families immediately at any tima that the. child is determined to be missing or that the child's whereabouts arc unknown. DONE AND ORDERED in Cleawatar, Pinellas County, Florida this, day of., cc: Esq. Esq. b~ietant State Attorney.. ~, ~arnii~ ~ontinult~ Program CIRCUIT JUDGE TRUE COW Oftglrul Qgfmd APR

10 IF1 THX CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL C OF 'EX STATE OF PLORIDA IS AND K)R PINELLAS JUDXILB DlVISION A Child. ORDER OF ME'DXA7'ION STATU8 CHECK (Continued) This cause came on to be heard on 2003, upon a mcdi~tion status chack. The following persona appeared before this Court1 s Asaiatant State Attorney; the mochrr,.... Eaq., representing the pother;, Esq., repreranting the father! and. I:=...~. ~. Fsmfly Continuity Program. The Court, having beard te~tirnony end being otherwise fully advlmcd in the premises. finds that: 1.?him Co~rt ha8 jurisdiction over tka rubjaet matter of this action. 2. Tho child,. : jr i r:.~., in currsnrly in the care, c~atody and control of the father,.. under protective services 6upemision, with auparvimion provided by the Family Continuity Program. The mother continues to have ~upervimed. 3. ~ viuicatfon with the child. '=: 8 A. i 3. The parties present today aager that Dr. Xlein, who:is currently prwiding counseling for the family, may submit.$ny recommendations to the Court regarding tha brmc interest^ of fhe ~: child, 4. Medieticn is this ~tter is schecu1.d for ~ondg, c,)...

11 Exhibit B THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing findings of fact, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDQED that I 1. Tha minor chlld mall remain in the care a d curtody of the fathrr,, undar the mupervision of the Department of Childran and Families/Pnmily Continuity Program, until further Order of the Court. 2. The mother ahill continue to have ouparvised viaitation yitb the child. 3 Dr. Klcin may aubmit reccmmandationo to the COW reguding the best interests of the child,..... arlaing from his cou?msllng 02 the family. 4. All prior Order., net inconmirrte~t with the preeant Order, mhall remaln in full force end affect. s. A mediation mtatus check shall ba car for Thurmday. at 11:OO A.M. of May, cc I EB~. r E=q. chilh Protective Investigator Famil Continuity Program Guard 1: an Ad Litem hs#istant State Attornmy CIRWZT COURT m E 7